The NA27 apparatus lists the following contents for P99 (dated as “ca. 400”, currently
held in the Chester Beatty Library). I’ve
given the references in an English-based system (though I still use “.” for a chapter/verse
separator, instead of “:”, because I’m lazy and don’t like to hit the shift key unless
I really have to), translated from the German system in the printed NA27 apparatus
appendix.

First, what’s up with Galatians? Why the large range covering most
of the book (1.18-6.15) followed by subranges amounting to 1.14-4.9? Is this content
duplicated in the papyrus? I’ve searched online for other contents listings of P99
only to see the same exact list duplicated in numerous locations. I’m confused as
to what the duplication might be indicating—or if it is a typo of some sort (it feels
like a book name is missing, but Galatians and Ephesians are in canonical order, so
it can’t be that … I don’t think).

Second, what’s up with Ephesians? Why is “1.22(?)” appended? Is it
that it occurs out of order after 2.21?

Just trying to get a handle on what’s listed in this particular entry and why. P99
is not in Comfort & Barrett (too late for them, apparently) so I can’t check there;
it is also not in Tischendorf because, well, Tischendorf is just far too early. Other
ranges in the NA27 appendix do not have overlapping ranges (well, not up through P99
nor through the uncials). Poking through the
site for the Chester Beatty Library was a dead end as well (though I’d love to
be proved wrong).

If you have any help for me, I’m all ears.

A Question about P99http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,7cec179c-a953-4917-9f14-e8413af7a572.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/2009/05/24/AQuestionAboutP99.aspx
Sun, 24 May 2009 21:25:22 GMT<p>
The NA27 apparatus lists the following contents for P99 (dated as “ca. 400”, currently
held in the <a href="http://www.cbl.ie/index.aspx">Chester Beatty Library</a>). I’ve
given the references in an English-based system (though I still use “.” for a chapter/verse
separator, instead of “:”, because I’m lazy and don’t like to hit the shift key unless
I really have to), translated from the German system in the printed NA27 apparatus
appendix.
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
Ro 1.1; 2Co 1.3-6; 1.6-17; 1.20-24; 2.1-9; 2.9-5.13; 5.13-6.3; 6.3-8.13; 8.14-22;
9.2-11.8; 11.9-23; 11.26-13.11; Gal 1.4-11; 1.18-6.15; 1.14-2.4; 2.5-3.19; 3.19-4.9;
Eph 1.4-2.21; 1.22(?); 3.8-6.24
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
I have two questions, actually.
</p>
<p>
<strong>First, what’s up with Galatians?</strong> Why the large range covering most
of the book (1.18-6.15) followed by subranges amounting to 1.14-4.9? Is this content
duplicated in the papyrus? I’ve searched online for other contents listings of P99
only to see the same exact list duplicated in numerous locations. I’m confused as
to what the duplication might be indicating—or if it is a typo of some sort (it feels
like a book name is missing, but Galatians and Ephesians are in canonical order, so
it can’t be that … I don’t think).
</p>
<p>
<strong>Second, what’s up with Ephesians?</strong> Why is “1.22(?)” appended? Is it
that it occurs out of order after 2.21?
</p>
<p>
Just trying to get a handle on what’s listed in this particular entry and why. P99
is not in Comfort &amp; Barrett (too late for them, apparently) so I can’t check there;
it is also not in Tischendorf because, well, Tischendorf is just far too early. Other
ranges in the NA27 appendix do not have overlapping ranges (well, not up through P99
nor through the uncials). Poking through <a href="http://www.cbl.ie/index.aspx">the
site for the Chester Beatty Library</a> was a dead end as well (though I’d love to
be proved wrong).
</p>
<p>
If you have any help for me, I’m all ears.
</p>
<img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/aggbug.ashx?id=7cec179c-a953-4917-9f14-e8413af7a572" />http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,7cec179c-a953-4917-9f14-e8413af7a572.aspxbleggreektextual criticismhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=3e786e8a-9b74-40a5-9ba9-62637c783264http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/pingback.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,3e786e8a-9b74-40a5-9ba9-62637c783264.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,3e786e8a-9b74-40a5-9ba9-62637c783264.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=3e786e8a-9b74-40a5-9ba9-62637c7832641

I also realized that Kenny spent 124 pages talking about Stylometry in the New Testament;
I'm giving a paper that is allotted perhaps 30 minutes (some portion of which is intended
for questions) for a corpus that is roughly four times the size of the New Testament.

In other words, I'm realizing that I'll have to give a very high level overview with
perhaps some glimpses at deeper-level data. Chances are I'll follow most of Kenny's
lead, which means:

Kenny then used portions of his data in the evaluation of certain textual issues,
mostly geared toward authorship (Luke/Acts, John/epistles/Revelation, Paulines). I'll
have to determine an issue to examine further using the data pulled together, but
I have some constraints:

No examination of JEDP, whatsoever.

No examination of authorship, whatsoever.

No examination of translational theory, whatsoever.

Given these constraints, are there stylistic issues in the LXX that you would suggest
I use for my example case study?

My own thoughts have to do with genre (say, look at stuff having to do with narrative
versus stuff having to do with poetry to see if there are any sorts of things that
seem to be indicative of one or the other). But I'm interested in what you might think
or suggest. For an idea of the criteria/features I'm tracking, see
this post.

More Thinking on Stylometry and the Septuaginthttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,3e786e8a-9b74-40a5-9ba9-62637c783264.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/2009/01/13/MoreThinkingOnStylometryAndTheSeptuagint.aspx
Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:35:53 GMT<p>
I've mentioned the upcoming <a href="http://www.bibletechconference.com/">Bible Technologies
Conference</a> and <a href="http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/2008/10/29/MyPaperSubmissionForBibleTech2009.aspx">the
paper I plan on presenting there</a> (also info <a href="http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/2008/11/19/StylometryAnthonyKennyAndFeaturesToTrack.aspx">here</a>).
I've recently realized that I've got a little more than two months to get the durn
thing written.
</p>
<p>
I also realized that Kenny spent 124 pages talking about Stylometry in the New Testament;
I'm giving a paper that is allotted perhaps 30 minutes (some portion of which is intended
for questions) for a corpus that is roughly four times the size of the New Testament.
</p>
<p>
In other words, I'm realizing that I'll have to give a very high level overview with
perhaps some glimpses at deeper-level data. Chances are I'll follow most of Kenny's
lead, which means:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
Rough overview of distribution of major parts of speech (nouns, adjectives, verbs,
adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions, etc.)</li>
<li>
Rough overview of most common words and their distribution/frequency</li>
<li>
Perhaps some further look at things like conjunctions and articles</li>
</ul>
<p>
Kenny then used portions of his data in the evaluation of certain textual issues,
mostly geared toward authorship (Luke/Acts, John/epistles/Revelation, Paulines). I'll
have to determine an issue to examine further using the data pulled together, but
I have some constraints:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
No examination of JEDP, whatsoever.</li>
<li>
No examination of authorship, whatsoever.</li>
<li>
No examination of translational theory, whatsoever.</li>
</ul>
<p>
Given these constraints, are there stylistic issues in the LXX that you would suggest
I use for my example case study?
</p>
<p>
My own thoughts have to do with genre (say, look at stuff having to do with narrative
versus stuff having to do with poetry to see if there are any sorts of things that
seem to be indicative of one or the other). But I'm interested in what you might think
or suggest. For an idea of the criteria/features I'm tracking, <a href="http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/2008/11/19/StylometryAnthonyKennyAndFeaturesToTrack.aspx">see
this post</a>.
</p>
<p>
Please feel free to leave a comment with your suggestion(s), or drop me an email (textgeek
at gmail dot com). Thanks!
</p>
<img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/aggbug.ashx?id=3e786e8a-9b74-40a5-9ba9-62637c783264" />http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,3e786e8a-9b74-40a5-9ba9-62637c783264.aspxbibletechbleggreeklanguageold testamenthttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=c99d8d17-bc59-4432-b3ed-4e7358518663http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/pingback.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,c99d8d17-bc59-4432-b3ed-4e7358518663.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,c99d8d17-bc59-4432-b3ed-4e7358518663.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=c99d8d17-bc59-4432-b3ed-4e73585186631

Long-time ricoblog readers know that I have a more-than-passing interest
in stylometry and stylistic studies, particularly in the realm of authorship attribution.

I'm also reading a lot about the Fathers of the Church (via Drobner). And for the
Church Fathers for whom we have much information and transmitted writings, there always
seems to be mention of documents that had been attributed to a Father at one point
in time that have since been proven/posited to not be from that Father.

So, the question: Does anyone have any references to stylometric studies of particular
Greek church fathers?

There has been much ink spilt on the question of authorship attribution of New Testament
epistles; but has anyone ever taken those same theories and applied them to the much
larger corpora of some of the Greek fathers? My primary contention is that the NT
is too small for the sorts of authorship studies folks do (vocabulary? bah, gimme
a million word corpus from an author and maybe we can do something). In other words,
I'd be interested in reading through if anyone has ever done for Chrysostom what P.N.
Harrison did to the Pastorals in his 1922 tome The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles,
and what sorts of results they came up with.

Any help?

Bleg: Stylistic Studies/Stylometry and Greek Church Fathers?http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,c99d8d17-bc59-4432-b3ed-4e7358518663.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/2008/02/27/BlegStylisticStudiesStylometryAndGreekChurchFathers.aspx
Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:11:14 GMT<p>
Long-time <strong>ricoblog</strong> readers know that I have a more-than-passing interest
in stylometry and stylistic studies, particularly in the realm of authorship attribution.
</p>
<p>
I'm also reading a lot about the Fathers of the Church (via Drobner). And for the
Church Fathers for whom we have much information and transmitted writings, there always
seems to be mention of documents that had been attributed to a Father at one point
in time that have since been proven/posited to not be from that Father.
</p>
<p>
So, the question: Does anyone have any references to stylometric studies of particular
Greek church fathers?
</p>
<p>
There has been much ink spilt on the question of authorship attribution of New Testament
epistles; but has anyone ever taken those same theories and applied them to the much
larger corpora of some of the Greek fathers? My primary contention is that the NT
is too small for the sorts of authorship studies folks do (vocabulary? bah, gimme
a million word corpus from an author and maybe we can do something). In other words,
I'd be interested in reading through if anyone has ever done for Chrysostom what P.N.
Harrison did to the Pastorals in his 1922 tome <em>The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles</em>,
and what sorts of results they came up with.
</p>
<p>
Any help?
</p>
<img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/aggbug.ashx?id=c99d8d17-bc59-4432-b3ed-4e7358518663" />http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,c99d8d17-bc59-4432-b3ed-4e7358518663.aspxbleggreeknew testamenthttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=552f0d7f-5c09-4e75-9de2-d9d76e7735f9http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/pingback.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,552f0d7f-5c09-4e75-9de2-d9d76e7735f9.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,552f0d7f-5c09-4e75-9de2-d9d76e7735f9.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=552f0d7f-5c09-4e75-9de2-d9d76e7735f9

Reading A Christian Inscription near Antiochhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,552f0d7f-5c09-4e75-9de2-d9d76e7735f9.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/2007/11/08/ReadingAChristianInscriptionNearAntioch.aspx
Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:08:44 GMT<p>
This morning, <a href="http://www.currentepigraphy.org/"><em>Current Epigraphy</em></a> posted <a href="http://www.currentepigraphy.org/2007/11/08/help-reading-an-inscription-spotted-in-imma-near-antioch/">a
bleg asking for help with a particular Christian inscription</a> spotted in Imma (which
is near Antioch).
</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.currentepigraphy.org/2007/11/08/help-reading-an-inscription-spotted-in-imma-near-antioch/">Check
it out</a>, and if you have the eyes to see, perhaps you can help them out!
</p>
<p>
Here's <a href="http://www.currentepigraphy.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/yenisehir.jpg">a
photograph of the inscription</a>, and here's <a href="http://www.currentepigraphy.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/imma.jpg">a
preliminary text of the inscription</a>. But be sure to check out the comments as
well.
</p>
<img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/aggbug.ashx?id=552f0d7f-5c09-4e75-9de2-d9d76e7735f9" />http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,552f0d7f-5c09-4e75-9de2-d9d76e7735f9.aspxblegchristianitygreekhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=7dce512d-2ea0-46ac-a179-d5d5bb0595b2http://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/pingback.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/PermaLink,guid,7dce512d-2ea0-46ac-a179-d5d5bb0595b2.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/CommentView,guid,7dce512d-2ea0-46ac-a179-d5d5bb0595b2.aspxhttp://www.supakoo.com/rick/ricoblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=7dce512d-2ea0-46ac-a179-d5d5bb0595b21

I'm curious what you think, so I'm asking. Is "they" == "Jesus and the 12" or is "they"
== "the 12"?